Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 18325
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. M. Subramaniam, K. Surender, JJ
N Nagavelu – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Dharmapuri – Respondent
WP No. 7374 of 2026
Advocates:
For the Appellant: Mr.M.Senthamizh Selvan
For the Respondent: Mr.T.Arunkumar,Addl.G.P. for R1 to R3, R5 & R6, Mr.M.Babu Muthu Meera, Addl.P.P. for R4
For the Appellant: Mr.M.Senthamizh Selvan
For the Respondent: Mr.T.Arunkumar,Addl.G.P. for R1 to R3, R5 & R6, Mr.M.Babu Muthu Meera, Addl.P.P. for R4
Writ of Mandamus is inappropriate for private disputes; petitioners should seek resolution through competent courts.
Headnote:The judgment examines a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution, addressing a petitioner's request to compel a governmental body to consider his representation made on January 12, 2026. The court finds a private dispute exists, rendering the petition inappropriate for writ relief. The petitioner is granted the opportunity to pursue resolution through competent legal avenues.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner filed for writ of mandamus. (Para 1) |
| 2. no writ relief due to existing private dispute. (Para 2) |
| 3. writ petition dismissed, petitioner to seek legal remedy. (Para 3) |
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)
Writ of Mandamus has been instituted to direct the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 12.01.2026.
2. Reading of the representation would show that private dispute exists between the parties. Thus, no Writ would lie under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
3. Granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent Court of law, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
